As of early 2026, numerous U.S. states have begun enforcing new restrictions on the types of foods that can be purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, commonly known as EBT cards.
These new purchase limits target sugary drinks, candy, and processed snacks in a growing effort to address public health concerns linked to poor diets among low-income households.
The EBT card rules are undergoing significant changes in several U.S. states as policymakers aim to combat rising rates of obesity and other diet-related health issues. These modifications come as part of broader federal and state efforts to steer public benefits away from purchasing unhealthy foods, favoring more nutritious options.
While the federal government has always provided guidelines for the use of SNAP benefits, states now have increased flexibility in imposing specific food restrictions. This flexibility follows the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) approval of SNAP Food Restriction Waivers.
These waivers allow states to limit purchases of certain items, notably sugary beverages, candy, energy drinks, and other junk foods, which many experts argue contribute to poor health outcomes, especially in underserved communities.
How Many States Are Introducing EBT Purchase Limits?
As of 2026, over 18 states have moved forward with SNAP purchase restrictions, with some taking effect as early as January 2026. While the changes vary, many states are targeting soda, energy drinks, and processed snacks.
According to USDA reports, the states making these adjustments include Indiana, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Missouri, among others.
Several states that have enacted these restrictions include:
- Indiana, where purchases of sugary drinks and energy drinks are now prohibited under SNAP benefits as of January 2026.
- Oklahoma, which will implement a similar restriction on soda and candy by February 2026.
- Georgia, where lawmakers are considering new restrictions for junk foods with the introduction of the “Healthier Choices Act.”
The restrictions aim to address rising obesity rates and the increasing prevalence of diet-related diseases, particularly in areas with high poverty rates.
As policymakers strive for healthier food environments, the overall goal is to enhance public health and reduce long-term healthcare costs by encouraging better nutritional choices.
Why Are States Implementing These Changes?
The growing focus on restricting certain food purchases with SNAP benefits stems from increasing concerns about the role that unhealthy diets play in public health. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), nearly 40% of American adults are obese, with higher rates among lower-income populations.
Experts argue that while SNAP is intended to provide low-income households with the means to purchase nutritious food, many recipients continue to use their benefits for less healthy food choices, which may perpetuate cycles of poor health.
Dr. Mary Mitchell, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, explains that these new restrictions are an effort to align public food assistance programs with the growing evidence linking diet to chronic illnesses, such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure.
“Policies like these are designed to curb the accessibility of low-nutrient, high-calorie foods that disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities,” said Dr. Mitchell. “By limiting these items, we are encouraging healthier habits, which could lead to better long-term health outcomes.”
The introduction of these restrictions is also being justified as part of the ongoing public health crisis resulting from food insecurity.
Data from the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) indicates that a disproportionate number of individuals relying on SNAP benefits face challenges related to diet and food availability. Some argue that the restrictions aim to provide healthier options within the program to counteract these issues.
Historical Context of SNAP: The Road to Restriction
To understand the magnitude of these new restrictions, it’s crucial to revisit the history of SNAP, which was originally created as the Food Stamp Program in the 1930s to combat hunger during the Great Depression. Since its inception, the program has undergone numerous changes to better meet the needs of low-income families.
In the 1970s, the program was expanded to allow recipients to purchase a wider variety of foods, which included almost anything that could be considered a basic staple, such as processed foods and sugary snacks.
In recent years, however, public health concerns and rising rates of obesity and other chronic diseases have led to a growing debate about the types of foods that should be subsidized by government assistance.
Which Foods Are Affected by the New SNAP Restrictions?
The types of foods that are subject to new purchase limits vary by state. While all states are targeting items that are widely considered to be junk foods, there is no single national list of restricted items. However, a general pattern has emerged, focusing primarily on:
- Sugary Drinks: These include sodas, sweetened teas, and energy drinks that are high in sugar and low in nutritional value.
- Candy and Confectionery: Items such as chocolate bars, gum, and other sugary snacks.
- Processed Snacks: Certain types of chips, cookies, and other ready-to-eat, processed foods that are high in salt, sugar, and unhealthy fats.
Each state has developed its own criteria for determining which items are restricted, based on nutritional standards and public health priorities.
For example, Indiana prohibits the use of SNAP benefits to purchase energy drinks, citing their high caffeine and sugar content as harmful to both children and adults. On the other hand, Oklahoma will initially restrict purchases of soda and candy but is exploring further limits on other processed foods.
Global Context: How Other Countries Handle Food Assistance
The restrictions on SNAP benefits have parallels in other countries, where food assistance programs also aim to promote healthier eating.
For example, Canada’s Food Security Program has imposed certain restrictions on processed and sugary foods in some of its provinces. Meanwhile, in parts of the European Union, restrictions on unhealthy foods have been a growing trend, as governments attempt to curb obesity rates among children and adults.
By comparing international policies, experts suggest that these types of restrictions are becoming part of a global movement to promote healthful eating habits. However, the implementation varies widely, and some countries have faced challenges in balancing food freedom with public health objectives.
Challenges and Potential Impact
While public health advocates support the new restrictions, the changes are not without their challenges. Implementing these rules will require significant monitoring and enforcement. Retailers will need to adjust their systems to flag prohibited items, and government agencies must ensure that food stores are compliant.
Additionally, there are concerns about how these changes will affect low-income families. Critics of the restrictions argue that these limits could disproportionately harm those already facing food insecurity by making it harder for them to access a wide variety of foods.
On the other hand, supporters argue that healthier food choices could improve long-term public health outcomes, especially for children in underserved communities.
However, Dr. Sarah Davis, an advocate with the American Public Health Association (APHA), states that, “While the intentions behind these restrictions are sound, ensuring that families have access to affordable and healthy alternatives is key to making this policy successful.”
Related Links
IRS 2026 Filing Rules – What’s New This Year and How Refund Processing Is Changing
Social Security Check Next Week – Find Out If You’re in the $5,181 Payment Group
What’s Next for SNAP?
As more states introduce these changes, the conversation about SNAP will likely continue to evolve. Some critics argue that the policy does not go far enough to address food deserts or ensure that low-income families have access to fresh, affordable, and healthy options.
Meanwhile, public health experts will continue to assess the long-term effects of these policies on obesity rates and diet-related diseases.
As this policy trend gains traction, it is clear that SNAP rules will be a topic of ongoing debate for years to come, with each state taking its own approach to balancing health priorities with the needs of low-income communities.
The growing trend to restrict purchases under SNAP benefits marks a significant shift in the way food assistance programs are viewed in the U.S. As more states begin to implement these changes, it remains to be seen how they will affect public health outcomes and the overall structure of the nation’s food assistance programs.
